Middle Class brainwashed into voting Republican

[daveman]

Think about it for a minute. We dont need to "get stuff" from the government, hence the justification for stealing 1/3 of our money is bogus.

You're asking franco to think?

Not gonna happen, pal.

Maybe not. But I have high expectations for everyone. Even if they dont live up to them.

Yeah, I'm a glass-is-half-full kinda guy myself, but you gotta recognize a lost cause when you see it.

 

[Avatar4321]

And yet, oddly, people insist on thinking for themselves instead of being good little proles and letting liberals do their thinking for them.

That's why the left's Utopian schemes are always doomed to failure: They do not take into account human nature, and they try to legislate thought.

Yet legislating thought is impossible. Heck, legislating behavior is difficult. You can't effectively change people by placing outside pressures on them. Dishonest people wont become honest because laws are passed. They simply find creative ways to be dishonest.

If we want to effectively change society we have to change people by changing them inside. And that always starts with ourselves.

Indeed. You can change yourself, but you can't change anyone else.

That's why leftism always fails.

You can change others. Just not with the use of force or with laws and regulations. It has to be done throuhg kindness, love, persuasion, honesty, truth, patience, long suffering etc. You can change people though that. But that process is much longer and often much deeper.

 

[Intense]

"Can you tell me why the slummiest of big cities continue to vote democrat, even though they're the ones that created the slums in the first place and do nothing but try to keep people in those slums?"

Bcause that's where the minority ghettos are, the minorities who know who the racists are...

Yeah, either that, or they are easily bought of with trinkets. I'll go with the latter.

 

[Intense]

ahhh rage boy, where has he been hiding?

Just looking for a cause.

Just looking for a clue. He wants to know if he can buy a vowel.

 

[daveman]

Yet legislating thought is impossible. Heck, legislating behavior is difficult. You can't effectively change people by placing outside pressures on them. Dishonest people wont become honest because laws are passed. They simply find creative ways to be dishonest.

If we want to effectively change society we have to change people by changing them inside. And that always starts with ourselves.

Indeed. You can change yourself, but you can't change anyone else.

That's why leftism always fails.

You can change others. Just not with the use of force or with laws and regulations. It has to be done throuhg kindness, love, persuasion, honesty, truth, patience, long suffering etc. You can change people though that. But that process is much longer and often much deeper.

The leftist agenda doesn't have that kind of time, nor does it have any interest in dealing with people as individuals.

 

[Avatar4321]

Indeed. You can change yourself, but you can't change anyone else.

That's why leftism always fails.

You can change others. Just not with the use of force or with laws and regulations. It has to be done throuhg kindness, love, persuasion, honesty, truth, patience, long suffering etc. You can change people though that. But that process is much longer and often much deeper.

The leftist agenda doesn't have that kind of time, nor does it have any interest in dealing with people as individuals.

No. But then I think the agenda is based off another's agenda who thought likewise, and he was cast from heaven for it.

The rest of us should be for dealing with people as individuals.

 

[daveman]

ahhh rage boy, where has he been hiding?

Just looking for a cause.

Just looking for a clue. He wants to know if he can buy a vowel.

 

[daveman]

You can change others. Just not with the use of force or with laws and regulations. It has to be done throuhg kindness, love, persuasion, honesty, truth, patience, long suffering etc. You can change people though that. But that process is much longer and often much deeper.

The leftist agenda doesn't have that kind of time, nor does it have any interest in dealing with people as individuals.

No. But then I think the agenda is based off another's agenda who thought likewise, and he was cast from heaven for it.

The rest of us should be for dealing with people as individuals.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Maybe you should stop hating those who have money and learn to be content with what you have or put yourself to work to get more for yourself.

What????? I just hate greedy rich people who screw people and the environment.The rich have doubled their wealth under voodoo while everyone else has lost. And you ask STUPID questions...I fear you are brainwashed...The non rich do better under Dems, and the rich do just fine too. No question the country's infrastructure stops falling apart too.

LOL..

I have that genius Warsaw on ignore. Please do me a solid and ask that rocket scientist this question...
"Because certain people have become more wealthy and you claim they have gained while you claim to have "lost", please give a few examples of what it is you have "lost".
I would imagine you'll get a convoluted answer filled with rhetoric. Or he will simply insult you and leave it at that.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Dear America, Why Are We Voting Against Our Own Self Interests?

I don't get it. Most people loath the super rich, and yet they sit around glued to FOX and vote to keep giving them tax breaks and favors. All the while, the buy the same old line of "they are the ones creating jobs" from the GOP. Guess what....THEY ARE SITTING ON THEIR TRILLIANS NOT CREATING JOBS.

I don't need to depend on the Federal Government to be successful or to provide me with a job, I just need them to get out of the way and allow me to be successful or "learn" (remember that word?) from my own mistakes. I do not need a Big Government to do anything FOR me, something the progessives don't understand. This idea of "dependency", that I simply can not make it on my own, I don't understand coming from the left. I'm not looking for a silver spoon, I'm not acting like a jealous teenage rich kid, looking to someone else (the rich) to provide for my own way of life. What ever happened to hard work, education, self discipline, and simply applying yourself?

Instead we have individuals that believe in entitlements: "that I simply deserve to receive what you have (handed to them on a silver platter) without doing any of the work that it requires to get there". Have we truely become "enslaved" to whatever the Federal Government can provide FOR US, or do we have the courage to make it on our own two feet and to have the integrity and character of acomplishing something for ourselves? Perhaps responsibility, accountability, self discipline, and good old fashioned hard work is the legacy we forget to demonstrate to the kids of this present generation?

 

[thereisnospoon]

Dear America, Why Are We Voting Against Our Own Self Interests?

I don't get it. Most people loath the super rich, and yet they sit around glued to FOX and vote to keep giving them tax breaks and favors. All the while, the buy the same old line of "they are the ones creating jobs" from the GOP. Guess what....THEY ARE SITTING ON THEIR TRILLIANS NOT CREATING JOBS.

I don't need to depend on the Federal Government to be successful or to provide me with a job, I just need them to get out of the way and allow me to be successful or "learn" (remember that word?) from my own mistakes. I do not need a Big Government to do anything FOR me, something the progessives don't understand. This idea of "dependency", that I simply can not make it on my own, I don't understand coming from the left. I'm not looking for a silver spoon, I'm not acting like a jealous teenage rich kid, looking to someone else (the rich) to provide for my own way of life. What ever happened to hard work, education, self discipline, and simply applying yourself?

Instead we have individuals that believe in entitlements: "that I simply deserve to receive what you have (handed to them on a silver platter) without doing any of the work that it requires to get there". Have we truely become "enslaved" to whatever the Federal Government can provide FOR US, or do we have the courage to make it on our own two feet and to have the integrity and character of acomplishing something for ourselves? Perhaps responsibility, accountability, self discipline, and good old fashioned hard work is the legacy we forget to demonstrate to the kids of this present generation?

This is a concept those on the political left do not understand or they dismiss it.
To them, government is the answer to everything.
Liberals look at the world and see "problems" or "crises".
Everyone else sees "challenges".
The former is a negative view, the latter a positive view.
The Left sees "try" the right sees "do".
The left hangs on the notion of the group. The right individualism. The Left sees individualism as selfishness and translates that into "the right is greedy and does not wish to share".
The left believes that because one person has "more" then by design another must have less.
We see this in their posts about "wealth distribution" sahre of the national income' , the so-called "wealth gap"....Those on the left are miserable people who have this undying need to know what the other person is doing, earning saving or investing. Once the other person has exceeded a certain wage or has accumulated more wealth than those on the left feel comfortable, they believe that to be unfair and somehow some way their mindset leads them to believe that something must have been taken from them. At that point those on the Left look to government to help them "take it back". Hence the concept of the "fair share of taxes paid".
It's a load of crap. However, show those on the left the numbers regarding which income levels carry the largest share of the federal and state tax burdens and they dismiss it as right wing propaganda.
It is almost as though liberal/progressives cannot be convinced that water is wet.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Dear America, Why Are We Voting Against Our Own Self Interests?

I don't get it. Most people loath the super rich, and yet they sit around glued to FOX and vote to keep giving them tax breaks and favors. All the while, the buy the same old line of "they are the ones creating jobs" from the GOP. Guess what....THEY ARE SITTING ON THEIR TRILLIANS NOT CREATING JOBS.

Worse, they don't understand to be competitive, we need a coalition of "Business, Universities and Government". That's how the "adults" do it.

The right believe that education is unnecessary and government an evil cabal. Lemmings on a march towards destruction, that's what they are. Ask them what their goal is and they insist it's some imaginary land of "Milk and Cookies". And all we need to get there is to move more wealth to the rich and get rid of government. These people are well beyond "stupid". They have become fools.

It's not that the right believes education is unnecessary. Rather teacher tenure should not become more important than the quality of education the children receives. Obama talks a smooth talk of building our children up to compete globally, but is unwilling to confront the obstacles that stands in the way of those goals. Teacher tenure and unions, after all are more popular for "political" votes and (at the end of the day) is the driving force behind the only thing that truly matters to Obama --- re-election. If his goal WAS after global competition through educating our youth, then why the dumming down of our students through states opting out of "No Child Left Behind"? Eric Holder and the Obama administration has sought out to lower standards before:
see: New Haven's Racial Test - WSJ.com
Dayton's News Source :: Top Stories - Civil Service Board Announces Police Recruit Scores

Is it more important to Obama that states uphold their school's "image" (heaven forbid states ever slip down to a "B" rating and must apply themselves harder) over quality of substance in education? If public schools through unions were doing such a great job, then why the big fear of (to use the words of Nancy Pelosi) "choice and competition" through vouchers with private schools? Are public schools really not able to compete at all, and its students left as "casualties of politics", when they later must confront and face the global job market?

 

[Liability]

Dear America, Why Are We Voting Against Our Own Self Interests?

I don't get it. Most people loath the super rich, and yet they sit around glued to FOX and vote to keep giving them tax breaks and favors. All the while, the buy the same old line of "they are the ones creating jobs" from the GOP. Guess what....THEY ARE SITTING ON THEIR TRILLIANS NOT CREATING JOBS.

Rejecting the lefties' brainwashing efforts doesn't make the middle class brainwashed by the GOP.

Silly school girl analysis like yours is strictly for laughs.

And no. Most RATIONAL people (a class of individuals which does not include you and your ilk) do not loathe the super rich.

And no. They are not sitting on their trillians (learn to spell, ya stupid putz). They got rich and stay rich by being smart. Putting money under the mattress doesn't earn them anything, so smart people DON'T sit on it (or lie down on it at night or bury it in a vault or box). They invest.

WITH that kind of money being invested, the people who put people to work GET to do just that.

IT is sad to see how the educational system failed you so fully.

 

[The T]

Dear America, Why Are We Voting Against Our Own Self Interests?

I don't get it. Most people loath the super rich, and yet they sit around glued to FOX and vote to keep giving them tax breaks and favors. All the while, the buy the same old line of "they are the ones creating jobs" from the GOP. Guess what....THEY ARE SITTING ON THEIR TRILLIANS NOT CREATING JOBS.

Rejecting the lefties' brainwashing efforts doesn't make the middle class brainwashed by the GOP.

Silly school girl analysis like yours is strictly for laughs.

And no. Most RATIONAL people (a class of individuals which does not include you and your ilk) do not loathe the super rich.

And no. They are not sitting on their trillians (learn to spell, ya stupid putz). They got rich and stay rich by being smart. Putting money under the mattress doesn't earn them anything, so smart people DON'T sit on it (or lie down on it at night or bury it in a vault or box). They invest.

WITH that kind of money being invested, the people who put people to work GET to do just that.

IT is sad to see how the educational system failed you so fully.

It would appear that the OP has no concept of Economic Liberty.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

The GOP would rather take the food out of a child's mouth, rather than remove an unfiar advantage for a rich man in the tax code. They have said as much. Don't you people understand that for every dollar that the rich are able to withhold from paying their fair share in taxes, you the middle class, have to make up that dollar.

Obviously you don't mind paying extra taxes so that the super rich can enjoy unfair tax breaks. That is very estute of you. You are being played for fools, and seem to be enjoying it.

Last I checked, the public school system is free, and everyone has the equal chance of applying themselves to be successful. Unless you happen to believe, as I do, the quality of education has suffered when compared to other countries in Europe. However kids must be motivated into desiring to educate themselves, rather than wandering the streets. Do you feel it's the right and duty of every American to pay for those who choose for themselves, NOT to seek public education, NOT to apply themselves, and NOT use the tools laid out before them so they can earn for themselves? To use the old analogy: a generous person will not simply feed them for a day, but will also teach them how to fish.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Here's an analogy I came up with today:

You work hard, make some money buy a house with a nice big piece of property.

Soon, developers come in and build low income apartments all around you.

Pretty soon you have kids running around, people picnicking and having barbeques all over your property.

You build a fence around your property to keep people out.

But, you have so much, and the apartment renters have so little.

I mean, you can't possibly use it all, right?

So, should the renters be able to pass a law that requires you to remove the fence so they can use what you worked to acquire ?

They do it in san francisco all the time.... the "people" want it for open space.

Why does that not surprise me...it's a logical extension of the liberal philosophy...and you can't get much more liberal than San Fran in the United States.

Not to mention California has the highest debt of any state in the United States. California representative Nancy Pelosi became Speaker of the House, and you wonder why Congress has followed suit and has fallen so far into debt as to effectively lose our nation's AAA rating for the first time in its history.

 

[The T]

They do it in san francisco all the time.... the "people" want it for open space.

Why does that not surprise me...it's a logical extension of the liberal philosophy...and you can't get much more liberal than San Fran in the United States.

Not to mention California has the highest debt of any state in the United States. California representative Nancy Pelosi became Speaker of the House, and you wonder why Congress has followed suit and has fallen so far into debt as to effectively lose our nation's AAA rating for the first time in its history.

California had better NOT come begging for a bailout. My vote will be a resounding NO as it would for any fiscally irresponsible State in this Union.

They voted themselves into thier collective messes, they can figure their way out like some States already have.

 

[barry1960]

Dear America, Why Are We Voting Against Our Own Self Interests?

I don't get it. Most people loath the super rich, and yet they sit around glued to FOX and vote to keep giving them tax breaks and favors. All the while, the buy the same old line of "they are the ones creating jobs" from the GOP. Guess what....THEY ARE SITTING ON THEIR TRILLIANS NOT CREATING JOBS.

I don't need to depend on the Federal Government to be successful or to provide me with a job, I just need them to get out of the way and allow me to be successful or "learn" (remember that word?) from my own mistakes. I do not need a Big Government to do anything FOR me, something the progessives don't understand. This idea of "dependency", that I simply can not make it on my own, I don't understand coming from the left. I'm not looking for a silver spoon, I'm not acting like a jealous teenage rich kid, looking to someone else (the rich) to provide for my own way of life. What ever happened to hard work, education, self discipline, and simply applying yourself?

Instead we have individuals that believe in entitlements: "that I simply deserve to receive what you have (handed to them on a silver platter) without doing any of the work that it requires to get there". Have we truely become "enslaved" to whatever the Federal Government can provide FOR US, or do we have the courage to make it on our own two feet and to have the integrity and character of acomplishing something for ourselves? Perhaps responsibility, accountability, self discipline, and good old fashioned hard work is the legacy we forget to demonstrate to the kids of this present generation?

This is a concept those on the political left do not understand or they dismiss it.
To them, government is the answer to everything.
Liberals look at the world and see "problems" or "crises".
Everyone else sees "challenges".
The former is a negative view, the latter a positive view.
The Left sees "try" the right sees "do".
The left hangs on the notion of the group. The right individualism. The Left sees individualism as selfishness and translates that into "the right is greedy and does not wish to share".
The left believes that because one person has "more" then by design another must have less.
We see this in their posts about "wealth distribution" sahre of the national income' , the so-called "wealth gap"....Those on the left are miserable people who have this undying need to know what the other person is doing, earning saving or investing. Once the other person has exceeded a certain wage or has accumulated more wealth than those on the left feel comfortable, they believe that to be unfair and somehow some way their mindset leads them to believe that something must have been taken from them. At that point those on the Left look to government to help them "take it back". Hence the concept of the "fair share of taxes paid".
It's a load of crap. However, show those on the left the numbers regarding which income levels carry the largest share of the federal and state tax burdens and they dismiss it as right wing propaganda.
It is almost as though liberal/progressives cannot be convinced that water is wet.

More drivel? You have created quite a liberal strawman argument there for yourself. Although I doubt you actually created it for yourself, just regurgitated it.

 

[frazzledgear]

What????? I just hate greedy rich people who screw people and the environment.The rich have doubled their wealth under voodoo while everyone else has lost. And you ask STUPID questions...I fear you are brainwashed...The non rich do better under Dems, and the rich do just fine too. No question the country's infrastructure stops falling apart too.

So your solution is totalitarianism and big government rule.

OH and **** your environment bullshit.

Idiocy. And goodnight! LOL!

You are joking when you said the non-rich do better under Democrats, right? Come on -its pretty obvious you never bothered to check that out to see if your belief system is actually supported by the FACTS or not. In modern history, the non-rich have typically done quite poorly under nearly every Democrat President compared to Republican ones.

You are aware the unemployment rate for blacks is always higher than it is for the general population no matter who is President, right? That is a matter of undeniable fact. So let's see how this group typically fares under a Republican President compared to say.........THIS President, a black man himself and as far left liberal as any President has been since Woodrow Wilson. Surely if blacks were ever going to do better it would be under a Democrat President who was also black himself, right????

Under the last Bush the average unemployment rate was 5.4% for his eight years in office -and for blacks it was 7.6%. Still higher than it was for the general population as it is for all Presidents - but less than 3 percentage points difference.

The unemployment rate today is 9.2% -but for blacks it is nearly 20%. Oh gee, that sure isn't a gap of less than 3 percentage points anymore is it? Worse yet is that in many large cities it is 24% and still climbing. For black teens it is above 50%. Oh sure, that is the PERFECT example of just how the non-rich do SOOOOO much better under Democrats, isn't it. That isn't even discussing the FACT that under this President the rate of poverty has been GROWING. In other words, he is creating MORE poor people, not fewer. Oh sure, MORE proof how the non-rich just THRIVE under Democrats, right? The economy under Bush grew at an average yearly rate of 2.5% which outstripped nearly every nation on the planet. How's it doing under this Democrat President?

Do you think voters can't tell the difference between a President handed a bad situation who is TRULY making progress with it -and one who is actually making it even WORSE? Reagan was handed a near-depression with double digit unemployment but by the time of his re-election, the trend was undeniably improving each month -he won re-election even though unemployment was still above 8% at the time. Because it was still dropping every month. Otherwise no other President has been re-elected to a second term with an unemployment above 7.2% with the exception of Reagan. Reagan won re-election by an historic LANDSLIDE because his policies were clearly improving the situation, had already created an economic boom -and did so in spite of Carter insisting our best days were behind us and we could look forward to nothing but a decreasing standard of living from then on -by the time Reagan left office, his financial and economic policies were responsible for THE largest economic boom in modern history. But then he understood what really happens when government gets out of the way. Want to compare that to this President who started with an unemployment rate of 7.4%? Think voters don't see what he did with THAT? Oh sure, the non-rich are doing SO much better now we have a Democrat in office than they did under all of Bush's 8 years.

Historians have already dissected how Clinton managed to get elected and why the first Bush lost his bid for re-election and it is a fact the existence of an atypical situation cost him his second term -or Clinton would not have been elected at all. Perot took a significant chunk of Bush votes especially in key states - giving Clinton the plurality. Clinton only won 42% of the popular vote. Clinton ran as a leftwing liberal and started off as a leftwing liberal too. But Democrats took a real shellacking at midterm elections during his first term and lost control of Congress -an event that is considered by NORMAL people to be a strong indicator of what's coming in another two years. It was an indication that if he made no substantial changes in what he was doing, Clinton would not be re-elected either. Remember the overwhelming majority had never wanted him in the first place. But unlike Obama who was handed a similar indicator, Clinton could see the writing on the wall and immediately changed what he was doing, abandoned his far leftwing extremist policies, immediately dropped all his class warfare rhetoric - and on many issues he just co-opted the Republican position and presented them as his own and if those positions went too far against Democrat positions, he would "triangulate" a new position somewhere between the two. The man lived by poll numbers because he actually had no foundation of core beliefs anyway and became a chameleon when it came to the issues. He would be whatever voters thought they needed if it would get him re-elected. It got him re-elected but it also meant he was ineffective at dealing with controversial issues that required strong leadership and is why he deliberately passed off to Bush three ticking time bombs that blew up on Bush in his first year -but that is another issue. But in spite of that Bush STILL ended up with the lowest average unemployment rate over his eight years than that of the three previous decades. And keep in mind Bush was immediately blamed for the economy just by being sworn in! That's right, liberals insisted the economy tanked right after Bush took office insisting it was the reaction to just HAVING a Republican President and even before he did anything at all. And did so in spite of the FACT Bush campaigned on the fact he said all economic indicators showed we were headed for a recession. I guess he was lying about that though -because the recession was really because a Republican was sworn in and couldn't possibly be the result of bad economic decisions made by Clinton the two last years of his administration. LOL But unlike Obama, perhaps you forgot Bush got us out of that recession before the end of his first year -and IN SPITE OF 9/11 that destroyed a quarter of our entire economy in a matter of minutes! Oh sure, chalk that one up to anything BUT the difference in Republican and Democrat policies when it comes to the economy.

So historians already know why and how Clinton broke the trend of a one term Presidency for modern Democrat Presidents since the end of WWll -and did so by acting more like a Republican -so let's look at how the non-rich did under Carter, a REAL Democrat. Carter was the very same kind of leftwing President Obama is -so surely we will see the non-rich THRIVING under this guy, right? Carter was handed an unemployment rate just below 7% -he nearly threw the nation into a depression in less than four years. Under Carter unemployment had skyrocketed to double digits, we had double digit inflation, double digit interest rates. And how did blacks do under Carter? The general unemployment rate was around 12% but for blacks it was 25% and in some large cities it was nearly 37%. For black teens it was nearly 80%. Oh SURE let's just pretend blacks must be among the RICH, right so that doesn't matter! Except under Carter, the ranks of those living in poverty GREW -he made MORE poor people, not fewer. Just like Obama has too! Where was all that "thriving" of the non-rich? But hey, those aggressively vicious class warfare policies Carter enacted just did WONDERS for the nation -no one was or still is a bigger proponent than that moron Carter who couldn't believe he wasn't re-elected on his campaign slogan "The best days of the US are behind us, so get used to it and tighten your belts another notch". Must have been a real shock to him that just wasn't a winner at the polls, huh. So let's pretend it was actually rich people who were kicked in the slats by this Democrat even though the people who suffered the worst under this President with the never ending class warfare policies of Democrats -were and always will be -the NON-RICH.

Like Obama, Carter managed to SWELL the ranks of those existing in poverty. And gee, that 70% top tax rate on the rich had NOTHING to do with the near depression Carter brought us too -how can government confiscating nearly all the wealth from those who created and earned it and just outright deny them the right to even enjoy the fruits of their own labor - possibly affect the non-rich, right? Or government revenues for that matter! Oh sure, when people know government is going to confiscate it, it has no effect on their behavior and they will continue to work an average 70 hour work week and continue busting their asses to earn it, right? So they get nothing for it. Like YOU would too, right? LOL Oh sure, I know I'm going to give up nearly every other aspect of MY life so government can swoop in and deprive me of the fruits of all MY hard work! ROFLMAO! And of course there is NO connection between the fact class warfare policies result in having fewer rich people and more poor people instead -with far fewer jobs for those at the bottom! NO relationship at all because liberals will insist to their dying breath the rich aren't the job creators anyway which is why it makes economic sense to them somehow to target them as the "enemy" of the state! Liberals will always insist the real "enemy" is actually fellow Americans -they just periodically change which group of them are tossed in with the rich that we are all supposed to despise, envy and hate -and are supposed to want to see government punish by confiscating the fruits of their labor. Strictly a liberal thing -NORMAL people can clearly see what the policies based on this really do -plus know that wanting to punish the successful for being successful is a communist value, not an American one.

Unemployment under Nixon was 6.6%. Ford served out the rest of Nixon's term continuing Nixon economic policies. Carter was elected largely in reaction to Nixon disgracing himself and the rejection of anyone associated with him -which meant his handpicked successor was never going to be a contender. In less than four years Carter's VICIOUS class warfare policies took us from an unemployment rate less than 7% to double digits. Oh sure, the non-rich just do so GREAT under Democrats.

If you bothered to HONESTLY study history and find out if it supports your easily disproven opinion the non-rich do SO much better under Democrat Presidents you would have discovered the real facts. But being a leftwing nutjob means you will never let reality get in the way of your fantasy anyway. Democrats LOVE and will try to enact class warfare policies -just as Carter did when President and just as Obama is attempting now -always insisting it can only affect the rich who just aren't paying their "fair" share. Although today the bottom 48% pay none at all. Democrats do so OVER and OVER in spite of the repeated PROOF of what they REALLY do to REAL people and in particular those who are NOT rich! In spite of the fact it will create more poor people every time. Notice how the moron Franco refers to rich people as "greedy" instead of what they really are -people willing to work a hell of a lot harder than the average person. The average work week of the rich is 70 hours -something I not only reject for myself but so does Franco. But unlike Franco, I will never waste my time envying and despising people who made a different decision than I did. I hope MORE people are willing to bust their asses to get rich -because we all benefit when there are more rich people, NOT fewer. More rich people puts upward pressure on wages and standard of living -for the information of those too mired down by their irrational ideology to grasp this reality.

Democrats so consistently seek class warfare policies I now suspect a larger class of poor people with more people living on the government dole is EXACTLY what Democrats are seeking in the first place -because increasing unemployment means increasing the ranks of those in poverty and increasing the numbers who will be existing on government handouts. Democrats believe those existing on government handouts are THEIR constituents and far more likely to vote for Democrats -and easy to manipulate by merely engaging in vitriolic attacks on the successful, told their failures are really the fault of people who made other choices than they did -and can more easily just outright buy their votes with promises of drips and drabs increases in the amount of their entitlement payment.

But you go ahead and keep telling yourself how the non-rich just do SOOOOO much better under a Democrat.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Dear America, Why Are We Voting Against Our Own Self Interests?

I don't get it. Most people loath the super rich, and yet they sit around glued to FOX and vote to keep giving them tax breaks and favors. All the while, the buy the same old line of "they are the ones creating jobs" from the GOP. Guess what....THEY ARE SITTING ON THEIR TRILLIANS NOT CREATING JOBS.

Why do idiots think voting for ever bigger government is in their interest.

Oh yeah, because they're idiots!